Test the school formula

The state Supreme Court is considering whether the new $7.8 billion school funding plan written by the Corzine administration will improve upon the goals the court enunciated more than three decades ago in ordering extra state aid for communities that could not afford to give their kids a decent education.

Or will that formula gut those ideals -- perhaps not immediately but inevitably -- by spreading limited state funding so thin that the 31 so-called Abbott districts go without the resources to deliver the "thorough and efficient education" the state constitution requires?

Ardent advocates of the original court order have gone back to the justices to challenge the new formula, which calls for providing Abbott-like funds to any district that cannot sufficiently educate its economically disadvantaged students.

The reaction might be premature. The administration should be given the benefit of the doubt because the first-year funding seems to deliver as promised, with $4.4 billion just for the Abbott districts. The court, however, must retain the authority to make certain the original goal is not diluted.

When the Abbott school funding lawsuit first came before the court, there was little executive or legislative interest in Trenton in using massive amounts of state funds to shore up local districts. The justices found the constitutional justification to order extra funding, then followed with separate orders to provide free preschool and rebuild the aged, crumbling schools in the Abbott districts.

The academic progress has been slow and uneven, and the oversight applied to the spending has often been lax. In recent months, audits have revealed questionable spending practices, including school bus drivers in Union City paid for the time spent recharging cell phones. Questionable trips, parties and perks and the kind of sloppy accounting that invites larceny and fraud were found in other districts.

Abbott defenders said the audits were an attempt to justify taking money away from the Abbotts and giving it to others. Even if those in charge failed to do as they should, the need to direct money -- and assure its proper use -- for the education of some 300,000 Abbott district kids would still exist and must be addressed. No state can sustain itself or its economy if it allows the miseducation of many of its residents.

Even if the Abbott schools had spent every dime judiciously with stellar academic results, the state would still need to expand aid to other communities struggling with their educational mission. It should not take a lawsuit to get such help.

Is Gov. Jon Corzine's formula the best way to achieve those goals? The true test of the formula will be how it works over time as needs grow and the state's resources shrink.

The state has started off with enough money to avoid significant cuts for the original Abbott schools, at least for now.

The court must make certain that going forward no district is victimized by this formula. Although we would prefer that the matter stay out of the courts, the justices must retain the right to step in, just as they did in the first instance, if the two other branches of government fail to do their duty.